Bangladesh Digital Security Act Turns into Political Weapon, Lawmakers Accused of Intimidation

↕

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. al-weapon-lawmakers-accused-of-intimidation.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Monday, November 24th 2025 at 19:25 GMT by The Daily Star
      Locale: BANGLADESH

The Digital Security Act: A Tool of Personal Vendetta?

In recent months the Bangladesh Digital Security Act (DSA), a law that was originally introduced to safeguard the country’s cyberspace, has increasingly been portrayed as an instrument of political intimidation and personal vendetta. A detailed report from The Daily Star sheds light on a series of incidents in which politicians and public officials have turned to the DSA to silence critics, settle private disputes, and even suppress dissenting voices in the media.

The DSA in Brief

Enacted in 2018, the DSA was intended to curb online defamation, cyber‑terrorism, and the spread of harmful content. Its broad language – “unlawful or defamatory content” – has, however, allowed authorities to interpret it flexibly. Under the act, the government can detain suspects without a trial for up to 90 days, issue takedown orders, and impose heavy fines. The law has been criticized for stifling free expression and for its opaque enforcement procedures.

The Daily Star’s piece points out that while the DSA was supposed to protect citizens, it has quickly become a “weapon” in the hands of those in power. The article stresses that this trend is not isolated; it is part of a wider pattern of misuse that has prompted civil‑society watchdogs and legal scholars to call for a review of the law’s scope and safeguards.

High‑Profile Cases of Misuse

1. Bangladesh Awami League MP Md. Nazrul Islam and the “Rumor” Case

In March, Awami League MP Nazrul Islam filed a complaint under the DSA against a local farmer who had allegedly circulated a video alleging that the MP had embezzled public funds. The farmer was arrested on the same day, and the police seized his social‑media accounts. The Daily Star cites an interview with the farmer’s lawyer, who warned that the case was “politically motivated” and a textbook example of the law being used to silence a private citizen.

2. Bishal Hossain, a Senior Police Officer, vs. a Journalistic Report

Bishal Hossain, a senior officer in the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), filed a DSA complaint against a journalist who had exposed alleged misconduct by the RAB in a series of investigative pieces. The journalist was ordered to delete the articles and, according to the report, was placed under police protection while the case was pending. The Daily Star notes that Bishal Hossain’s case illustrates how the DSA can be invoked to target investigative journalism and to shield law‑enforcement officers from scrutiny.

3. The “Social‑Media Hate” Incident Involving a University Student

A student from the University of Dhaka posted a meme that was deemed “offensive” by a local politician who had a personal feud with the student’s family. The politician used the DSA to file a complaint that led to the student’s social‑media accounts being temporarily suspended, and the student was called in for questioning by the police. The Daily Star’s source on the incident pointed out that the student had not engaged in any criminal activity and that the use of the DSA in this case was “a clear abuse of power.”

The Legal and Civil‑Society Response

The Daily Star’s article includes perspectives from several key stakeholders.

Legal Experts

A prominent constitutional lawyer, Prof. Faruk Rahman, argued that the DSA “violates Article 19 of the Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression.” He warned that the law’s vague wording could be used to target political opponents and “undermine democratic discourse.” Prof. Rahman also highlighted the absence of an effective judicial review process, noting that “once the police file a complaint, the victim has limited recourse.”

Civil‑Society Organizations

The report features statements from Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which condemned the “extremely alarming trend” of DSA‑based harassment. The RSF’s press‑release, which the article links to, calls for the immediate withdrawal of any DSA clauses that enable prolonged detentions without trial. In a similar vein, the Bangladesh Center for Democratic Rights (BCDR) released a joint statement urging the government to amend the law to prevent its use for “personal or political grudges.”

Government Officials

The report also presents the government’s counter‑argument. The Ministry of Posts, Telecommunications and Information Technology (MoPT) released a press statement that the DSA is “necessary to combat cyber‑crime” and that it is “strictly applied by trained officers.” Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Mr. Rabiul Islam, said that “the law is in line with constitutional provisions” and that “there will be no misuse of this law.” The article notes that such official assurances have been dismissed by critics who point to the pattern of misuse.

Broader Implications

The Daily Star’s piece does not shy away from examining the broader social and political ramifications of this trend. The misuse of the DSA has led to a chilling effect on free speech, especially in the digital domain. Journalists have reported a rise in self‑censorship, fearing that a single tweet could land them in legal trouble. Political opposition figures have warned that the law could be weaponised to eliminate rivals, thereby eroding the checks and balances essential to a functioning democracy.

The article concludes with a call for reforms: “If the DSA is to serve its original purpose—protecting citizens from harmful digital content—it must be restructured to ensure it does not become an instrument for personal revenge.” Suggested measures include clearer definitions of defamation, a mandatory judicial review after the initial 90‑day detention period, and the establishment of an independent oversight body.

Final Takeaway

The Daily Star’s investigative reporting paints a sobering picture: what began as a security measure has, in the hands of some politicians and officials, become a tool for settling personal scores. The law’s misuse threatens not only individual rights but also the very fabric of democratic engagement in Bangladesh. As civil‑society groups, legal scholars, and international observers rally for reform, the country faces a pivotal choice: to tighten safeguards around the DSA or to risk its further erosion of free expression and accountability.